this post was submitted on 15 Sep 2025
845 points (99.2% liked)
People Twitter
8171 readers
2667 users here now
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
- Mark NSFW content.
- No doxxing people.
- Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
- No bullying or international politcs
- Be excellent to each other.
- Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician. Archive.is the best way.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This was presented before a judge, in the NY Supreme Court, and it has proceeded to discovery, as allowed by the judge
There's a big difference between a judge saying you can proceed to Discovery and you getting up in front of a judge and swearing to tell the truth or face perjury charges. That's the bar. That's when all those lawsuits in 2020 failed. Because none of them would risk being disbarred or jailed. Once you get to that point I'll start giving more credence. But I wish them the best of luck in Discovery.
Well almost zero of Trumps 2020 election lawsuits met even the low bar of proceeding to discovery, and were dismissed outright, including 30 lawsuits that were dismissed after a hearing on the merits. (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-election_lawsuits_related_to_the_2020_U.S._presidential_election) So when you said, “presented before a judge” I took you at your word. What you should have said was “proceeded to trial” because that’s when you do all the swearing in. Or depositions- but that’s part of discovery, which this suit about the 2024 election is already in, so technically if there are any depositions taken, people are already swearing oath right now. So I guess by either definition this trial is one to take seriously.
We'll see